See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/277829011

The Concept of Using Offset Piston to Improve the Engine Power

Conference Paper · August 2010

CITATIONS READS

0 6,365

1 author:

Jarut Kunanoppadol
Silpakorn University, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
11 PUBLICATIONS   34 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Jarut Kunanoppadol on 08 June 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation for Sustainable Well-Being II
(STISWB II), 13-14 August 2010, Quang Binh University, Viet Nam.

The Concept of Using Offset Piston to

Improve the Engine Power
Jarut Kunanoppadol
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering and Industrial Technology, Silapakorn University,
Nakornprathom 73000, Thailand
E-mail: jarut_k@hotmail.com

Abstract

The research was aimed at studying the concept to modify the internal combustion engine by
offsetting the piston to move in the reversing direction against the crank rotation, enabling the piston,
the connecting rod, and the crank to form a quick return mechanism. The piston hence could reduce
the moving time from the top-dead center to the bottom-dead center while the piston could increase
the moving time from the bottom-dead center back to the top-dead center. The net indicated power of
the engine then could be increased. Mathematic analysis was used to examine the result from
offsetting the piston in order to compare with the normal engine movement. Engine specifications and
thermodynamic assumptions were conducted to get initial data for analysis. The offsetting percentage
was pinned at 0% before analysis for the normal engine. However, the percentage was set at 10%,
20%, 30%, and 40% for the engine with the offset piston while the crank ratio was changed from 3.0
to 3.5, and 4.0 respectively for all cases. According to the research result, offsetting the piston could
increase movements of the piston mechanism, the connecting rod, and the crank. The stroke, the
displacement volume, and the compression ratio then were also scaled up, leading to an increase in the
thermodynamic cycle and the indicated work figure consequently. The quick return mechanism
formed by movements of the piston, the connecting rod, and the crank could add up the indicated
power. Based on the analysis, the indicated power of the engine could be enhanced by 0.278%,
0.196%, and 0.146% where the crank ratio was set at 3.0, 3.5, and 4.0, respectively while the
offsetting percentage was increased to 1%.

Keywords: offset-piston engine, internal combustion engine, indicated power

1. Introduction other words, the intake stroke and the exhaust

Offsetting the piston was to shift the moving
direction of the piston from the center of the
crank. The result of offsetting the piston in the
same direction with the crank rotation could
reduce the force between the piston and the side
of the cylinder. This could cause friction,
vibration, and noise while the engine was
working; therefore, the engine would have more
mechanism efficiency. (Haddad & Tjan, 1995).
Considering the movement of the mechanism,
offsetting the piston in the same direction with
the crank rotation would help reduce the piston
side force while it was moving from the top-
dead center to the bottom-dead center, or in
stroke of the four-stroke engine. In the same
time, the force at the other side of the piston
would increase when the piston moved back
from the bottom-dead center to the top-dead
center, or in other words, the intake stroke and
the exhaust stroke as well. According to related
researches, the greater the offset length, the
lesser the force on the anti-thrust side, but the
greater the force on the thrust side. (Nakayama
et al, 2000; Wakabayashi, 2003). Cho et al, 2003
also concluded that offsetting the length of the
piston too much would instead increase the
friction when the engine was working in high
engine speed. Offsetting the piston in the same

1
International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation for Sustainable Well-Being II
(STISWB II), 13-14 August 2010, Quang Binh University, Viet Nam.

direction with the rotation of the piston therefore
would be beneficial to the operation of the
machine in reducing the friction, fuel
consumption, and noise when the engine was
working in low and middle engine speeds.
The research made an analysis in another
viewpoint by offsetting the piston to move in the
opposite direction with the crank rotation to
benefit the movement of the mechanism.
Offsetting the piston could make the piston, the
connecting rod, and the crank form a kind of a
simple quick-return mechanism. (Mabie &
Reinholtz, 1987). Offsetting the piston in the
opposite direction with the crank rotation could
increase the time that the piston used to move
from the bottom-dead center to the top-dead
center. However, it would reduce the time that
the piston used to move back from the top-dead
center to the bottom-dead center. The operation
was conducted under the idea that when the
work caused from the movement of the piston
remained the same, the power at the intake
stroke and the power stroke would increase if
the time that the piston used to move from the
top-dead center to the bottom-dead center
reduced. Using the same idea, the power at the
compression stroke and the exhaust stroke
would decrease if the time that the piston used to
move from the bottom-dead center to the top-
dead center increased. The net power could
increase if the power from the engine gained
during the power stroke was added while the
power from the engine gained during the
compression stroke was deducted. The research
would use mathematical analysis to study the
result from offsetting the movement of the
piston to increase the engine power. Only the
piston was changed during the experiment while
the connecting rod and the crank would not be
changed for convenience in actual use.
Changing only the piston would alter the stroke
figure, the displacement volume, and the
compression ratio of the engine. The research
therefore analyzed all changing value by mainly
considering the net power or the result of the
experiment gained from the engine. The analysis
could be done by pinning the offsetting
percentage at 0% for the normal engine. The
percentage was set at 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40%
for the engine with the offset piston while the
crank ratio was changed from 3.0 to 3.5 and 4.0
respectively for all cases. Details of the research
would be elaborated later on with engine
specifications, thermodynamic assumptions, the
quick-return mechanism theory, the Otto cycle,
the analytical results, and the conclusions,
respectively.

(1) INLINE (2) OFFSET

TDC
Anti-thrust side
Thrust side

d d
Stroke1 Stroke 2
b+a

BDC 1 b+a BDC 2

b d

b-a F
b-a

a ?

a ß a ß

Upward (ßٛٛٛٛDownward (a ٛ Upward (ßٛٛٛٛDownward (a ٛ

(Quick Downward)
Fig.1: Inline and offset piston engine layout

2
International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation for Sustainable Well-Being II
(STISWB II), 13-14 August 2010, Quang Binh University, Viet Nam.
Table 1: Engine specification information and
thermodynamics assumption
4-Stroke, 4-Inline
Engine type Cylinder Gasoline
Engine
Bore and Stroke 86 x 86 mm
Compression ratio 10:1
Engine speed 3000 rpm
Crank ratio (OR) 3.0, 3.5, 4.0
0%, 5%, 10%, 15%,
Offset percentage (OP)
20%
Intake pressure 101.325 kPa
Intake temperature 333 K
Combustion efficiency 80%
Ratio of specific heat (k) 1.35
Specific heat (Cv) 0.821 kJ/kg-K
AF ratio (gasoline) 14.6
2. Engine Specification Information and
thermodynamics assumptions
In mathematic analysis, the researcher
indicated engine specifications information and
thermodynamics assumptions to use in
calculation as illustrated in Table 1. The crank
ratio was the length proportion between the
connecting rod by the crank. Normally the ratio
was about 3.0 to 4.0 for small engines.
(Pulkrabek, 2004; Wakabayashi, 2003) The
offsetting percentage was the length percentage
of the offset by the crank. Related researches
had indicated the offset length in units of length;
however, the researcher viewed that it should be
related with the length of the crank to prevent
the offset length from exceeding. (Cho et al,
2003) The offset length therefore was set in
percentage and in proportion with the length of
the crank for convenience in using with engines
of other sizes. Offsetting was made in the
opposite direction with the rotation of the crank
as shown in Figure 1. The researcher indicated
the intake pressure, the intake temperature, the
combustion efficiency, the specific heat, the
specific heat ratio, the air-fuel ratio, and the
heating value. The specifications of initial
values for calculation were prepared to ensure
that analysis of the differences between the
engine with the offset piston and the normal one
were made in the same bases, and only the
differences caused by offsetting the piston were
considered.
3. Quick-return mechanism theory
Offsetting the movement of the piston
enabled the piston, the connecting rod, and the
crank to form a quick return mechanism, making
the time that the piston used to go and come
back unequal. Only the piston was changed to
modify the normal engine to become the one
with the offset piston while the connecting rod
and the crank remained the same. This could
alter the length that the piston moved as
illustrated in Figure 1. Therefore, the movement
of the piston must be calculated again as
follows;
Crank length
a = S /2 (1)
Connecting rod length
b = a × CR (2)
Offset
d = a × OP% (3)
Axial piston distance at TDC
xTDC = ( b + a )2 + d 2 (4)
Axial piston distance at BDC
xBDC = ( b − a )2 − d 2 (5)
New piston stroke
S ′ = xTDC − xBDC (6)
New displacement volume
π
Vd′ = B 2 S ′ (7)
4
New compression ratio
V′
rc = d − 1 (8)
Vc
Whereas; a is the length of the crank, b is the
length of the connecting rod, d is the offset
length from the original direction, S is the
stroke, CR is the crank ratio, OP% is the
offsetting percentage, B is the diameter of the
cylinder, and Vc is the clearance volume.
The movement to go and come back of the
quick-return mechanism could be analyzed from
the forward angle, the backward angle, and the
time ratio. As shown in Figure 1, the upward
angle could be defined as the rotation angle of
the crank when the piston moved from the
bottom-dead center to the top-dead center.
Meanwhile, the downward angle could be
defined as the rotation angle of the crank when
the piston moved back from the top-dead center
to the bottom-dead center. (Mabie & Reinholtz,
1987). The analysis could be done as follows;
3
International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation for Sustainable Well-Being II
(STISWB II), 13-14 August 2010, Quang Binh University, Viet Nam.
Upward angle
α = φ + 180 − ψ (9)
Downward angle
β = ψ + 180 − φ (10)
Time ratio
α analysis, including the intake pressure, the
rt = (11)
β the air-fuel ratio, and the fuel heat. The analysis
Whereas;
⎛ d ⎞
ψ = sin −1 ⎜ ⎟ (12)
⎝b−a⎠
⎛ d ⎞
φ = sin −1 ⎜ ⎟ (13)
⎝b+a⎠
If this time ratio ( rt ) is greater than 1.0, the
mechanism could be classified as the quick-
return one.
4. Otto-cycle theory
The Otto-cycle theory is a thermodynamic
cycle used to analyze the function of four-stroke
engine using gasoline fuel. The intake air,
comprising air and fuel in stoichiometric form,
was sent into the cylinder during the intake
stroke under stable pressure. In the compression
stroke, the volume of intake air was compressed
and reduced, prompting the intake pressure and
temperature to increase while the compression
was made in constant entropy. The combustion
caused in the Otto-cycle had constant volume.
The heat caused from the combustion process
could increase both the pressure and the
temperature of the gas rapidly. Expansion of the
heat gas caused by the combustion pushed the
piston to move from the top-dead center to the
bottom-dead center, creating the work in the
power stroke while the compression was made
in constant entropy as well. After the completion
of the heat gas combustion, exhaust was pushed
out from the cylinder in the constant pressure
during the exhaust stroke. It could be seen that
work must be put to the engine during the
intake, compression, and exhaust strokes, and
the engine would return the works back only
during the power stroke. Calculations could be
made as follows;
Work in intake and exhaust stroke
W = PΔV (14)
Work in compression and power stroke
Δ ( PV )
W= (15)
1− k
Whereas; P is the pressure, V is the volume, k
is the specific heat ratio used in this analysis, set
at 1.35.
This research analyzed the thermodynamic
cycle by specifying initial values prior to the
intake temperature, the combustion efficiency,
on the differences from offsetting the moving
direction of the piston was carried out by
considering the indicated work gained from the
cycle and the net indicated work at the engine
speed of 3,000 rpm. The indicated work in each
stroke could be calculated as follows;
(Pulkrabek, 2004)
Power in intake and power stroke
⎛ 1 rpm α + β ⎞
W = W ⎜ ⎟ nc (16)
⎝ 4 60 β ⎠
Power in compression and exhaust stroke
⎛ 1 rpm α + β ⎞
W = W ⎜ ⎟ nc (17)
⎝ 4 60 α ⎠
Whereas; rpm is the engine speed, and nc is the
number of pistons of the engine. After having
the indicated work for each stroke, the
calculation for the net indicated work could be
done to analyze the differences between the
engine with the offset piston and the normal
engine.
5. Analytical results
In the mathematical analysis, the process
analyzed the changing movement of the piston
mechanism, the connecting rod, and the crank,
and their effects to the stroke length, the
displacement volume, and the compression ratio.
The analysis was also made on thermodynamic
cycle and its effects to the pressure, the
temperature, the indicated work, and notably the
indicated power gained from the engine. In the
analysis, the crank ratio was changed into three
values, including 3.0, 3.5, and 4.0.
(Wakabayashi, 2003) The offsetting percentages
were prepared in five figures. The percentage
was pinned at 0% before analysis for the normal
engine. However, the percentage was set at
10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% for the engine with
the offset piston.
According to the analysis of the movement of
the piston mechanism, the connecting rod, and
the crank as illustrated in Table 2, it could be
seen that offsetting the piston could increase the
4
International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation for Sustainable Well-Being II
(STISWB II), 13-14 August 2010, Quang Binh University, Viet Nam.

stroke length of the engine further. This change example could be seen from the analysis under
could be noticed clearer in the engine with the the conditions and assumptions specified in
lesser crank ratio. Considering the offsetting, it Table 1. When the crank ratio was set at 3.0
is found that the greater the offsetting while the offsetting percentage was set at 40%
percentage, the longer the stroke length. The with the offsetting length of 17.20 mm, the net
changes of the stroke length would change in indicated work could increase from original by
relation with the displacement volume of the 11.468%.
cylinder and the compression ratio. It could be
seen that the greater the direction offset, the Table 3: Thermodynamics results of normal
greater the displacement volume and the engine and offset-piston engine; Indicated work
compression ratio of the engine. The change Description Offset percentage
could be noticed clearer for the engine with the 0% 10% 20% 30%
lesser crank ratio as well. CR = 3.0
Intake -0.0506 -0.0507 -0.0508 -0.0509

Table 2: Results of mechanism motion Compress -0.1991 -0.1993 -0.1999 -0.2008

Offset percentage Power 0.8929 0.8936 0.8956 0.8991

Description Exhaust -0.2271 -0.2272 -0.2275 -0.2280
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Offset (mm) 0.00 4.30 8.60 12.90 17.20 Total 0.4161 0.4164 0.4175 0.4194
Strike (mm) CR = 3.5
CR = 3.0 86.00 86.05 86.22 86.49 86.88 Intake -0.0506 -0.0507 -0.0507 -0.0508
CR = 3.5 86.00 86.04 86.15 86.35 86.62 Compress -0.1991 -0.1993 -0.1997 -0.2003
CR = 4.0 86.00 86.03 86.11 86.26 86.46 Power 0.8929 0.8934 0.8948 0.8973
Displacement volume (cc) Exhaust -0.2271 -0.2271 -0.2274 -0.2277
CR = 3.0 499.76 500.07 501.01 502.60 504.85 Total 0.4161 0.4163 0.4171 0.4184
CR = 3.5 499.76 499.98 500.65 501.77 503.36 CR = 4.0
CR = 4.0 499.76 499.93 500.43 501.27 502.45 Intake -0.0506 -0.0507 -0.0507 -0.0508
Compression ratio Compress -0.1991 -0.1992 -0.1995 -0.2000
CR = 3.0 10.00 10.01 10.02 10.05 10.09 Power 0.8929 0.8933 0.8944 0.8962
CR = 3.5 10.00 10.00 10.02 10.04 10.06 Exhaust -0.2271 -0.2271 -0.2273 -0.2276
CR = 4.0 10.00 10.00 10.01 10.03 10.05 Total 0.4161 0.4163 0.4168 0.4178

As seen in the analysis on thermodynamic Table 4: Thermodynamics results of normal

cycle of the engine with the offset piston as engine and offset-piston engine; Indicated power
illustrated in Table 3 and Table 4, the increase Offset percentage
Description
of indicated work was in line with the increase 0% 10% 20% 30%
of the offsetting percentage. The change could CR = 3.0
be observed clearer in the engine with the lesser Intake -5.0638 -5.1076 -5.1588 -5.2179
crank ratio. In Table 4, it could be seen that the Compress -19.9131 -19.7740 -19.6728 -19.6085
combination of the increase of indicated works Power 89.2897 90.0751 91.0165 92.1242
and properties of the quick-return mechanism Exhaust -22.7059 -22.5372 -22.3916 -22.2683
could increase the time that the piston used to Total 41.6069 42.6562 43.7933 45.0295
move from the bottom-dead center to the top- CR = 3.5
dead center. In the meantime, the time that the Intake -5.0638 -5.0949 -5.1310 -5.1724
piston used to move back from the top-dead Compress -19.9131 -19.8140 -19.7415 -19.6953
center to the bottom-dead center could be Power 89.2897 89.8468 90.5107 91.2863
decreased. As a result, the net indicated power Exhaust -22.7059 -22.5857 -22.4816 -22.3932
of the engine could be increased. Total 41.6069 42.3522 43.1565 44.0254
The changing percentage of the net indicated CR = 4.0
power of the engine with offsetting piston was Intake -5.0638 -5.0871 -5.1140 -5.1448
equal to the normal engine as illustrated in Compress -19.9131 -19.8387 -19.7841 -19.7492
Figure 2. It showed that the lesser the crank ratio Power 89.2897 89.7068 90.2022 90.7786
and the greater offsetting percentage, the greater Exhaust -22.7059 -22.6156 -22.5373 -22.4706
the net indicated power of the engine. An Total 41.6069 42.1655 42.7668 43.4140

5
 International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation for Sustainable Well-Being II
(STISWB II), 13-14 August 2010, Quang Binh University, Viet Nam.

Indicated Power Improvement (%)

14 doi:10.1016/0094-114X(94)00035-J.
CR 3.0 : y=0.278x , R2=0.993 [3] Nakayama, K., Tamaki, S., Miki, H., and
12 CR 3.5 : y=0.196x , R2=0.994
CR 4.0 : y=0.146x , R2=0.994 CR 3.0 Takiguchi, M., 2000. “The effect of crankshaft
10 offset on piston friction force in a gasoline
engine” SAE Paper 2000-01-0922.
8 CR 3.5
[4] Mabie, H. H., and Reinholtz, C.F., 1987.
6 CR 4.0 Mechanisms and dynamics of machinery. 4th
edition, John Wiley & Sons,
4
ISBN: 0-471-80237-9.
2 [5] Pulkrabek, W.W., 2004. Engineering
0 fundamentals of the internal combustion engine.
0 10 20 30 40 50
2nd Edition, Person. Educ,
ISBN: 0-13-191855-9.
Offset Percentage (%) [6] Wakabayashi, R., Takiguchi, M., Shimada,
T., Mizuno, Y., and Tamauchi, T., 2003. “The
Fig. 2: Indicated power improvement of effects of crank ratio and crankshaft offset on
offset-piston engine base on normal engine piston friction losses,” SAE Paper 2003-01-
0983.
6. Conclusions
Modifying the engine by offsetting the piston
to move in the reversing direction against the
crank rotation, could enable the piston, the
connecting rod, and the crank to form a quick
return mechanism. This would be beneficial as it
could increase the stroke of the engine while the
displacement volume and the compression ratio
also increased as well. A thermodynamic effect
then was created as the indicated work gained
from the engine increased. The movement of the
quick-return mechanism could reduce the time
used in the intake stroke and the power stroke
but increase the time used in the compression
stroke and the exhaust stroke, leading to an
increase in the net indicated power. By using
engine specifications and thermodynamic
assumptions as detailed above, the net indicated
power of the engine increased by 0.278%,
0.196%, and 0.146% when the crank ratio was
set at 3.0, 3.5, and 4.0 respectively, under the
offsetting percentage of 1%.

6. References
[1] Cho, M. R., Oh, D. Y., Moon, T. S., and
Han, D. C., 2003. “Theoretical evaluation of the
effects of crank offset on the reduction of engine
friction,” Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs, Vol. 217 Part
D: J. Automobile Engineering, pp. 891-898,
doi: 10.1243/095440703769683298.
[2] Haddad, S. D., and Tjan, K., 1995. “ An
analytical study of offset piston and crankshaft
designs and the effect of oil film on piston slap
excitation in diesel engine,” Mech. Mach.
Theory, Vol. 30, Issue 2, pp. 271-284,

View publication stats